Da Silva

[Antman]

Surely a starter at LB now?

he looked tidy (as well as tiny! - the bloke who went ‘Hi Ho...!” When he came on made me laugh)

he may be a little ring rusty, but we can’t afford to mess about (again) playing right sided players at left back etc etc. Give him game time asap!

 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Antman said:

Surely a starter at LB now?

he looked tidy (as well as tiny! - the bloke who went ‘Hi Ho...!” When he came on made me laugh)

he may be a little ring rusty, but we can’t afford to mess about (again) playing right sided players at left back etc etc. Give him game time asap!

 

It is the morning after Saturday night, give him a break. 

[robin_unreliant]

So what about Lloyd Kelly?

Do we stick with him at CB or does he sit on the bench while we develop someone else's player instead.

I would prefer that we give LK a good run at LB once our imjured CBs are available.

[Antman]

9 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

So what about Lloyd Kelly?

Do we stick with him at CB or does he sit on the bench while we develop someone else's player instead.

I would prefer that we give LK a good run at LB once our imjured CBs are available.

For me, Right now we need him at CB - isn’t that his preferred position anyhow?

i agree he needs to keep getting games

[city1983]

I think see the logic in playing Pisano rather than dasilva. Middlesbrough are a tall physical side and would have posed a danger from set pieces, so I guess he wanted taller stronger players out there. And the fact that they didn’t score from a set piece, or ever look likely, that tactic clearly worked. But the defence just looked makeshift and we’re letting in sloppy goals. All over the pitch we’ve got players playing out of position, and as a result we look disjointed with players not knowing their roles. Even with the injuries we’ve got, we still have enough to not be playing everyone out of position.

And what has Elliason done to be dropped?

[Ian Crabbe]

I agree totally with the thoughts that Da Silva may have been deemed too small to deal with the physical presence yesterday,but every team in the league is physically stronger than us,in the premier league size isn’t everything but in the championship physicality matters a lot,IMO we are far too lightweight.

[Always Believesham]

36 minutes ago, Antman said:

For me, Right now we need him at CB - isn’t that his preferred position anyhow?

i agree he needs to keep getting games

I thought it was, but it would be difficult for him to displace Baker when he is back though, as he is one of few recognised leaders.

Does Kelly have a bit of Louis Carey about him? I believe Carey was brought into the team as a Full Back originally and moved to play CB eventually - I'm sure he will get more games in both full back and CB (preempting a Baker suspension)

Although I did think Da Silva was the direct runner we needed though. He linked up with O'Dowda well and it opened up space for Kelly himself to step out with the ball. I wouldn't like to see us limit ourselves to 1 marauding full back when both Hunt and Da Silva have a lot to offer to the attack, I assume he went off for more than just tactical reasons though.

No one should come out of yesterday smelling of roses and if you eradicate the two calamitous errors it's a totally different game, Kelly proved he's not out of his depth and for a good portion of the game held his own, I hope we can play with both LK & JDS.

 

[Hampshire reds]

if we are not going to play him then what is the point of having the lad. but this is lee who does this with loan players. 

[Spoons]

58 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

So what about Lloyd Kelly?

Do we stick with him at CB or does he sit on the bench while we develop someone else's player instead.

I would prefer that we give LK a good run at LB once our imjured CBs are available.

Lloyd Kelly is a centre back. He's played there all through the academy and also after speaking to him at a kids half term footy camp, he made it clear that's where he wants to play.

Obviously he will play where he's told but why would we play players out of position. Certainly didn't work yesterday with Watkins and pisano. 

[JoeAman08]

3 minutes ago, Hampshire reds said:

if we are not going to play him then what is the point of having the lad. but this is lee who does this with loan players. 

Give him some time ffs. He has been here just over two weeks. Doesn’t know anyone, didn’t have a preseason with us and is making the step from L1 to championship. 

I understood why he did not play yesterday in theory. Then when you see the came he was clearly the better option. Downing was not going to be attacking back post and DaSilva would have caused them problems all game. Be surprised if he was not starting Tuesday. 

Kelly should retain his spot after yesterday even if Baker and Wright are fit. You should not lose your spot when you are probably the best player on the pitch for your team. Be brave and play them both. Honestly, they have the potential to be two bright spots for us and I do not see many others who fit that description. 

[Hampshire reds]

give him Time. you  are joking. the idea of  loans is to strenghen the team. someone who can come in and make the team stronger not to get fit and sit on the bench. we do this far to much. 

[Andy082005]

1 hour ago, Antman said:

Surely a starter at LB now?

he looked tidy (as well as tiny! - the bloke who went ‘Hi Ho...!” When he came on made me laugh)

he may be a little ring rusty, but we can’t afford to mess about (again) playing right sided players at left back etc etc. Give him game time asap!

 

Why play him at left back when you a perfectly unfit right back to play there?

[Red-Robbo]

Kelly is the obvious LB when we have a fit central defender. I can only see DaSilva as a sub to inject a bit of pace.

He looked tasty yesterday, leaving Downing for dead on three occasions, but this was in the second half when Boro were largely content to sit back.

Can you imagine him trying to defend set pieces with Flinty and Fry towering over him?

With his forward momentum and pace, I wonder if he'd be more natural in MF?

[Flagon]

Physically inferior or not, we lost anyway so why mess about playing players out of position. I could have understood it if we had gone for it and then made those types of changes to shut the game out but we did it in reverse to try and get back into the game! The irony.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, JonDolman said:

But why can't we play to our strengths?

Certainly a huge argument for that - certainly at home.

It was clear that Pisano's selection was only to have a bit of a physical presence in our box when defending set pieces, and he isn't even very good at that anyway, like when he let Flint have a free header.

In fairness, Pisano did enough with his body to put Flint off, who I thought was fouling Pisano as the cross came over.

Downing might be 34, but he's still quick and Pisano couldnt cope with his pace.

For their second goal, look how little help Brownhill gives Pisano...none.  Pisano will want to show him inside, into Brownhill, but Brownhill just watches and points.

And we had no one to go on the outside of Paterson. Joke of a selection really.

I thought Pisano had a decent game....i think you are being unfair and nit-picking because you don’t rate him.  He isn’t a natural LB, but he offered width, got the ball in advance positions, but us never gonna outstrip their RB, like a Bryan might.

I said after Shrewsbury friendly that Cameron Pring looked far better than Pisano at left back. I'm not saying Pring is the answer, but surely that friendly showed Pisano is not good enough at left back.

Give the guy some credit for being played out of position.  Again, I don’t think he let anyone down yesterday.  There are other players you should be looking at way ahead of Pisano.

And all the games at right back shows he lacks the pace, stamina and concentration to play anywhere in our side. I actually think he looked more comfortable at centre back as at least he doesn't have to run much in that position, but then it wasn't like Plymouth really attacked us much so was generally an easy game for him. 

Your views of his performances ahead of yesterday has clouded your view of his he played yesterday imho.

 

38 minutes ago, Hampshire reds said:

give him Time. you  are joking. the idea of  loans is to strenghen the team. someone who can come in and make the team stronger not to get fit and sit on the bench. we do this far to much. 

He’s been here a week, needs to learn the drills etc.  Do we know he was brought in to start, or provide cover for LK?  In hindsight it looks like it’s possible that LK and JDS could both play, after their performances yesterday.

 

[1960maaan]

This is going to turn out to be a pretty pointless comment as LJ is not going to change formations any time soon .

With Da Silva and Hunt , both looking very good going forward. Webster looking good on the ball , Kelly too come to that , with Baker and Wright as proper defenders. I think we could easily play a 3 at the back with WB's. That would give space for 3 CMF and 2 up top.  

But with the wingers LJ's bought we won't do that, I do wonder how he'll juggle Kelly and Da Silva, hope they don't have a must play when fit clause with Chelsea.

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

2 hours ago, Antman said:

For me, Right now we need him at CB - isn’t that his preferred position anyhow?

i agree he needs to keep getting games

No he's a gifted left back and our gifted left back.

[TBW]

3 hours ago, robin_unreliant said:

So what about Lloyd Kelly?

Do we stick with him at CB or does he sit on the bench while we develop someone else's player instead.

I would prefer that we give LK a good run at LB once our imjured CBs are available.

I'd prefer we play whoever is best. 

[OldlandReddies]

Kelly and Dasilva are too good not to play so either LK is first choice CH with Dasilva LB or first choice LB with Dasilva LM. Thats how i see it.

[Fiale]

Baker has looked poor for months now (not sure if he still has a niggling injury, not fully fit or is just dialling it in) though if fairness most of the squad looked poor form January onwards.

[BobBobSuperBob]

4 hours ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

No he's a gifted left back and our gifted left back.

Glad you keep up

LJ , (and LK himself)  sees him(self) as a Centre Half (At whatever point)

[robin_unreliant]

4 hours ago, OldlandReddies said:

Kelly and Dasilva are too good not to play so either LK is first choice CH with Dasilva LB or first choice LB with Dasilva LM. Thats how i see it.

I just don't see LJ picking Kelly at CB when one of either Wright or Baker is fit again. So my question is why play DaSilva when Kelly needs the time to develop and is our player, not a loanee.

Will be interesting to see how Kelly does at CB in an away game. We will have to expect more pressure than boro gave us yesterday and it might tell us if he is ready to play in that position. He's still young and inexperienced and it may be too early to expect him to cope.

[robin_unreliant]

3 minutes ago, robin_unreliant said:

 PS. Can't see DaSilva in midfield with all the wingers we've signed!

 

[shelts]

8 hours ago, robin_unreliant said:

So what about Lloyd Kelly?

Do we stick with him at CB or does he sit on the bench while we develop someone else's player instead.

I would prefer that we give LK a good run at LB once our imjured CBs are available.

I’m totally with your post

[Mr Popodopolous]

It's a dilemma for a number of reasons. Play whoever merits it though I think, otherwise why loan Da Silva?

Two other factors too...benching Da Silva for large chunks of season will surely put us down the list of priority for Chelsea loanees. Other clubs might notice it too, it could have a knock on effect.

Plus, do we have a penalty clause as with Kent for not playing enough games?

Not saying we should therefore bump Da Silva up to first choice just like that, but factors to consider certainly.

 

[Fuber]

8 hours ago, city1983 said:

I think see the logic in playing Pisano rather than dasilva. Middlesbrough are a tall physical side and would have posed a danger from set pieces, so I guess he wanted taller stronger players out there. And the fact that they didn’t score from a set piece, or ever look likely, that tactic clearly worked. But the defence just looked makeshift and we’re letting in sloppy goals. All over the pitch we’ve got players playing out of position, and as a result we look disjointed with players not knowing their roles. Even with the injuries we’ve got, we still have enough to not be playing everyone out of position.

And what has Elliason done to be dropped?

The issue is that it means we're playing to combat Boro's strengths rather than focus on our own.

McInnes and Millen did the same.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, robin_unreliant said:

I just don't see LJ picking Kelly at CB when one of either Wright or Baker is fit again. So my question is why play DaSilva when Kelly needs the time to develop and is our player, not a loanee.

Will be interesting to see how Kelly does at CB in an away game. We will have to expect more pressure than boro gave us yesterday and it might tell us if he is ready to play in that position. He's still young and inexperienced and it may be too early to expect him to cope.

there’s a good chance we might find out on Tuesday!!

 

55 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It's a dilemma for a number of reasons. Play whoever merits it though I think, otherwise why loan Da Silva?

Two other factors too...benching Da Silva for large chunks of season will surely put us down the list of priority for Chelsea loanees. Other clubs might notice it too, it could have a knock on effect.

Plus, do we have a penalty clause as with Kent for not playing enough games?

Not saying we should therefore bump Da Silva up to first choice just like that, but factors to consider certainly.

 

The current loan system is bollox, but I would rather we only loan players the Head-Coach believes are better than he has.  Does Desilva meet that requirement?  I dunno, but I suspect it’s more cover / competition than to replace LK.  I do appreciate it isn’t as simple as that though.

[marcofisher]

With Bakers poor form and injury record its clear that we will see Dasilva a fair bit this season.

Magnússon was clearly sold as LK is a better replacement who can play both positions incredibly well, so for all the arguing about what position he is, it seems like he is being given an education in how to play both, which I don't think is a bad thing as he is a naturally well rounded athlete. When Baker is injured or playing poorly (both likely) then LK will move across to CB and Dasilva will come in at left back. 

The most important thing for Kelly is that he is playing as much as possible irregardless of whether it is at centre half or left back. 

[redsquirrel]

for me against Plymouth,dasilva looked our only player attacking with intent of hurting them.i don't mean physically,but was going that bit further trying to create an opening rather than stopping and passing sideways.